共產檔
MISH - MASH
Communist China and the Free World’s Future
MICHAEL R. POMPEO, SECRETARY OF STATE
YORBA LINDA, CALIFORNIA
THE RICHARD NIXON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY AND MUSEUM
JULY 23, 2020
https://www.state.gov/communist-china-and-the-free-worlds-future/
美國國務卿邁克爾·蓬佩奧星期四(7月23日)在加利福尼亞州約巴林達的理查德·尼克鬆總統圖書館發表題為《共產中國與自由世界的未來》的演說。
這位美國首席外交官說，尼克鬆總統近50年前開始的接觸政策並沒有改變中國共產黨馬列政權本質，而且給北京帶來了好處，美國不能再回到與中國“盲目接觸”的模式了。他說，華盛頓將繼續與北京對話，但必須對中共采取“不信任，而且要核實”的態度。蓬佩奧說，美國人民和各國必須開始改變對中共的看法，不能再把中共領導下的中國視作“正常國家”。他還說，中共不能代表14億中國人民，美國不能再忽視中國人民包括勇敢的異議人士的呼聲。蓬佩奧在講話中特地向在場的中國民主運動人士魏京生和王丹致意。他在講話中還呼籲建立“新的民主聯盟”，他說，自由世界一定能夠打敗“新暴政”。
最近一段時間以來，特朗普政府高級官員，包括國家安全顧問羅伯特·奧布萊恩、聯邦調查局局長克裏斯托弗·雷和司法部長威廉·巴爾先後就中國問題發表講話，蓬佩奧在加州的演說是最新一次。
以下是蓬佩奧國務卿講話的全文翻譯：
謝謝你，謝謝大家。謝謝州長的介紹，實在是過獎了。的確，你走進那個健身房，提起“蓬佩奧”的名字時，會有人悄悄耳語。我有個兄弟，馬克，真的是很棒，真的是很棒的籃球手。
再次為藍鷹儀仗兵和空軍下士凱拉·海史密斯和她精彩的國歌演唱鼓掌，怎麽樣？
也感謝勞瑞牧師動人的禱告，我想感謝休·休伊特和尼克鬆基金會邀請我在這個重要的美國機構發表講話。很高興有一位空軍的人為我唱歌，一位海軍陸戰隊的人為我做介紹，而且他們讓陸軍的人站到了海軍的人的房子前。這一切都很好。
很榮幸來到約巴林達。尼克鬆的父親在這裏建了這座房子，他在這裏出生長大。
感謝尼克鬆中心董事會和工作人員使我和我的團隊今天的活動成為可能，在眼下這樣做絕非易事。
我們有幸看到在座的有些非常特殊的人，包括克裏斯，我得以結識他，克裏斯·尼克鬆。我還想感謝翠西·尼克鬆和朱莉·尼克鬆·艾森豪威爾對這次訪問的支持。
我還想感謝幾名勇敢的中國異議人士，他們遠道而來參加我們今天的活動。
所有的其他貴賓，所有的其他貴賓，感謝你們來到這裏。那些能夠坐在帳篷下麵的人，你們一定是多付錢了。
也感謝那些收看直播的人。
最後，就像州長提到的，我出生在聖安娜，離這裏不太遠。今天在座的有我姐姐和姐夫。謝謝你們來。我敢打賭你們從來也沒想到我會站在這裏。
我今天的講話是一係列有關中國的演說的第四部分，我請國家安全顧問羅伯特·奧布萊恩、聯調局局長克裏斯·雷和司法部長巴爾與我一道發表這些演說。
我們有一個非常明確的目的、一個真正的使命。這就是解釋美中關係的不同層麵、幾十年來累積起來的那種巨大的關係失衡以及中國共產黨的霸權意圖。
我們的目標是表明，特朗普總統中國政策旨在解決的針對美國的威脅是顯而易見的，而且我們為確保這些自由製定了戰略。
奧布萊恩大使講到了意識形態。聯調局局長雷談到了間諜問題。司法部長巴爾講到了經濟。我今天的目標是為美國人民把這些匯總在一起，詳細闡述中國的威脅對我們的經濟、我們的自由乃至世界各地自由民主的未來意味著什麽。
明年將是基辛格博士秘密訪問中國半個世紀的一年，離2022年尼克鬆總統訪華50周年也不太遠了。
大家知道，那時的世界大為不同。我們曾經想象，與中國接觸將會產生團結合作的光明未來。然而，因為中共未能履行對世界的承諾，今天我們都仍然戴著口罩，目睹大流行病死亡人數的上升。每天早晨，我們都在讀著打壓香港和新疆的新聞頭條，我們看到造成美國就業流失、沉重打擊美國各地、包括南加州這裏的經濟的中國不當貿易行為的驚人統計數字，我們目睹中國軍隊變得越來越強大並且越來越具威脅性。
從加利福尼亞這裏到我的故鄉堪薩斯州以至更遠的地方，美國人心靈和腦海中縈繞著這些問題，我也要重複它們：
與中國接觸50年後，美國人民現在有什麽成果可以示人？
我們的領導人提出的中國朝著自由與民主演變的理論被證明是正確的嗎？
這是中國所定義的“雙贏”局麵嗎？
而且，從一位國務卿的視角來看，核心的是，美國更加安全了嗎？我們自身以及我們後代的和平前景是不是更大了？
我們必須承認一個無情的事實。如果我們希望有一個自由的21世紀，而不是習近平所夢想的中國世紀，我們必須承認一個無情的事實並應以此作為我們未來幾年和幾十年的指導：與中國盲目接觸的舊模式根本做不成事。我們絕不能延續這個模式。我們決不能重回這個模式。
特朗普總統非常明確地表示，我們需要一個戰略，保護美國經濟，還有我們的生活方式。自由世界必須戰勝這個新暴政。
在我好像急於要破壞尼克鬆總統的遺產之前，我希望明確表示，他做的是他當時相信對美國人民最為有利的事情，而且他可能是對的。
他是一位出色的中國研究者、強悍的冷戰勇士、而且是中國人民的仰慕者，---我想我們大家都是。
必須要充分肯定的是，他認識到中國實在太重要了，不能被忽視，即使當時的中國因為自我施加的共產暴政而處在被削弱的狀態。
1967年，尼克鬆在《外交事務》雜誌上發表的一篇非常著名的文章中解釋了他的未來戰略。這是他說的話。他說： “長遠來看，我們根本無法承受永遠讓中國留在國際大家庭之外…...除非中國改變，世界不會安全。因此，在我們對事件所能影響的範圍內，我們的目標應為引導改變。”
我認為這是整篇文章的關鍵詞：“引導改變”。
因此，尼克鬆總統曆史性的北京之行，開啟了我們的接觸戰略。他崇高地尋求一個更為自由、更為安全的世界。他希望中國共產黨會對那個承諾做出回報。隨著時間的推移，美國決策者日益假定，隨著中國變得更為繁榮，它會開放，對內會變得更為自由，而且對外不那麽具有威脅性，更為友好。我敢肯定，一切似乎都顯得如此的勢在難免。
然而，勢在難免的時代結束了。我們一直在追尋的那種接觸政策沒有在中國境內帶來尼克鬆總統所希望引導的那種改變。
事實是，我們的政策，還有其它自由國家的政策，重振了中國失敗的經濟，看到的卻是北京反咬喂食給它的國際之手。
我們向中國公民張開了雙臂，換來的卻是中共利用我們自由與開放的社會。中國派出宣傳手進入我們的記者會、我們的研究中心、我們的高中和大學，甚至進入我們家長教師協會的會議。
我們把我們在台灣的朋友邊緣化，台灣後來成長為一個生機勃勃的民主。
我們給予中國共產黨及其政權本身特殊的經濟待遇，看到的卻是中共堅持要求在其踐踏人權的問題上保持沉默，把這作為允許西方公司進入中國的代價。
就在前些天，奧布萊恩大使提出了幾個例子：萬豪、美國航空、達美和美聯航都從它們的公司網站上刪除了提到台灣的地方，以免觸怒北京。
離此不遠的好萊塢，---這個美國創意自由的中心和自封的社會公正的仲裁者，對哪怕是中國稍微不利的說法都實行自我審查。
企業界對中共的默默接受在全世界各地都在發生。
企業界的這種效忠效果如何？這種奉承得到了回報嗎？我來引用司法部長巴爾上星期的演說中的一句話，他說：“中國統治者的終極企圖不是與美國進行貿易。它是搶掠美國。”
中國竊取我們珍視的知識產權和商業秘密，使美國各地損失了數以百萬計的就業崗位。
它從美國吸走了供應鏈，然後加上了奴工器具。
它使世界的關鍵水道對國際商貿不那麽安全了。
尼克鬆總統曾說，他擔心，他把這個世界向中共開放，創造了一個“怪物弗蘭肯斯坦”。而這就是我們所處的局麵。
誠信者可以辯論為什麽這麽多年來自由國家會允許這些壞事發生。也許我們當初對中國的共產主義毒株過於天真，或者冷戰之後，我們相信自己必勝，或者我們是貪婪的資本家，或者被北京的“和平崛起”言論所蒙蔽。
無論什麽原因，中國今天在國內越來越威權，而且越來越咄咄逼人地敵視世界其它地方的自由。
特朗普總統已經說了：夠了。
我不認為兩黨中有很多人對我今天所舉出的事實提出質疑。但是即使是現在，有些人還在堅持說，我們必須保留那種為了對話而對話的模式。
現在，要明確說明的是，我們會堅持對話。但是如今的交談不一樣了。幾個星期前，我去檀香山見了楊潔篪。
還是老一套，話說了很多，但真的是沒有提出要改變任何行為。楊的承諾，跟中共在他之前做出的很多承諾一樣，是空洞的。我猜測，他的預期是，我會屈從於他們的要求，因為坦率地說，太多以往的行政當局都這樣做了。我沒有。特朗普總統也不會。
奧布萊恩大使闡述得很好，我們必須記住，中共政權是馬克思-列寧主義政權。習近平總書記是一個破產的極權主義意識形態的真正信仰者。
他的意識形態決定了他數十年來對中國共產主義全球霸權的渴望。美國不能再忽視我們兩國之間政治和意識形態的根本不同了，就像中共從來也沒有忽視它們一樣。
我在眾議院情報委員會任職、隨後擔任中央情報局局長以及出任國務卿兩年多來的經曆讓我有了這樣的核心理解：
真正改變共產中國的唯一方式就是以中國領導人如何表現而不是說什麽為基礎來采取行動。你可以看到美國的政策對這個結論做出回應。裏根總統說，他本著“信任但要核實”跟蘇聯打交道。對中共，我的說法是：“我們必須不信任，而且要核實。”
我們這些世界上熱愛自由的國家，必須引導中國做出改變，就像尼克鬆總統所要的那樣。我們必須以更具創造性而且更為強勢的方式引導中國做出改變，因為北京的所作所為威脅著我們的人民與我們的繁榮。
我們必須從改變我國人民與合作夥伴對中國共產黨的看法開始。我們必須說實話。我們不能像對待其他國家一樣，把這個中國的化身當作一個正常的國家。
我們知道，與中國進行貿易不像與一個正常、守法的國家進行貿易。北京把國際協議視為建議，作為獲得全球主導地位的渠道。
但是，通過堅持公平條款，就像我們的貿易代表在達成第一階段貿易協議時所做的那樣，我們可以迫使中國正視其盜竊知識產權和傷害美國工人的政策。
我們也知道，與中共支持的公司做生意與一家公司、比如一家加拿大公司做生意是不一樣的。他們不聽從於獨立的董事會，而且很多公司是國家讚助的，不需要追求利潤。
一個好的例子就是華為。我們已經不再假裝華為是一個無辜的電信公司，它隻是來確保你能和你的朋友交談。我們以它本來的麵目來稱它 --- 一個真正的國家安全威脅 ---而且我們采取了相應的行動。
我們也知道，如果我們的公司在中國投資，他們可能有意或無意地支持共產黨對人權的嚴重侵犯。
我們的財政部和商務部因此對中國領導人以及正在傷害和侵犯世界各地人民基本權利的實體進行製裁並將他們列入黑名單。好幾個政府部門合作製定了一個商業谘詢公告，以確保我們的首席執行官了解他們的供應鏈在中國境內的運作情況。
我們也知道，並不是所有的中國學生和雇員都是來這裏隻是為了多掙一點錢或者多為自己積累一些知識的正常學生或工作人員，他們中有太多的人是來盜竊我們的知識產權並它們帶回自己的國家。
司法部和其他部門已經在大力尋求懲罰這些罪行。
現在我們知道，中國人民解放軍也不是一支正常的軍隊。它的目的是維護中國共產黨精英的絕對統治，拓展中華帝國，而不是保護中國人民。
因此，美國國防部加強了在東中國海、南中國海以及台灣海峽的自由航行行動。我們建立了太空軍來幫助阻遏中國侵略太空這個最後邊疆。
坦率地說，我們在國務院也建立了一套與中國打交道的政策，推動特朗普總統的公平對等的目標，改寫幾十年來不斷增加的失衡。
就在本星期，我們宣布關閉中國在休斯頓的領事館，因為那裏是間諜活動和知識產權盜竊的中心。
兩個星期前，我們逆轉了八年來在有關南中國海國際法問題上的那種右臉被打轉過左臉的做法。
我們已經呼籲中國使其核能力符合我們這個時代的戰略現實。
國務院在各個層級而且在世界各地與我們的中國同行進行接觸，隻是為了要求公平和對等。
但我們的作法不能隻是一味強硬。這不大可能達到我們想要的結果。我們還必須與中國人民進行接觸，並賦予他們力量，---他們是充滿活力、熱愛自由的人民，與中國共產黨完全不同。
這要從麵對麵的外交開始。無論走到哪裏，我都遇到了才華橫溢、勤奮努力的中國男性和女性。
我見過從新疆集中營逃出來的維吾爾人和哈薩克族人。我和香港的民主領袖們交談過，從陳樞機主教到黎智英。兩天前，我在倫敦與香港自由鬥士羅冠聰會麵。上個月，我聽到了天安門廣場幸存者的故事。其中一位今天就在這裏。
王丹是一名關鍵的學生，他從未停止為中國人民的自由而鬥爭。王先生，請站起來，我們好認出你來。
今天和我們在一起的還有中國的民主運動之父魏京生。他因為倡導民主而在中國的勞改營裏度過了幾十年。魏先生，請站起來，好嗎？
我在冷戰時期長大並在陸軍服役。如果我學到了什麽的話，那就是，共產黨人幾乎總是撒謊。他們撒的最大的一個謊言是，要認為他們是在為14億被監視、壓迫和恐嚇得不敢說出真相的人民說話。
恰恰相反。中共對中國人民誠實意見的恐懼甚於任何敵人。除了失去對權力的掌控之外，他們沒有理由恐懼。
試想一下，假如我們能夠聽到武漢醫生們的聲音，假如他們被允許對一種新型的冠狀病毒的爆發發出警報，全世界，更不要提中國境內的人，會好得多。
在太長的時間裏，我們的領導人忽視或淡化勇敢的中國異見人士的言論，他們就我們麵臨的這個政權的性質警告過我們。
我們不能再忽視它了。他們和任何人一樣清楚，我們永遠不可能回到現狀了。
但是，改變中國共產黨的行為不可能僅僅是中國人民的使命。自由國家有捍衛自由的工作要做。這絕不是輕而易舉的事情。
但我有信心我們能做到。我有信心，因為我們以前做過。我們知道事情會怎麽發展。
我有信心，因為中國共產黨正在重複蘇聯曾經犯過的一些錯誤---疏遠潛在的盟友，在國內外破壞信任，拒絕接受產權和具有可預見性的法治。
我有信心。我有信心是因為我看到其他國家的覺醒，他們知道我們不可能回到過去，就像我們在美國一樣。從布魯塞爾到悉尼到河內，我都聽到這個信息。
最重要的是，我有信心我們能夠捍衛自由，因為自由本身就是一種甜美的吸引力。
在中國共產黨加強對香港這座驕傲的城市的控製時，看看那些爭相著要移民海外的香港人吧。他們揮舞的是美國國旗。
的確是有差異。與蘇聯不同的是，中國已經深深地融入了全球經濟。但北京對我們的依賴比我們對他們的依賴更大。
我拒絕這樣的看法，即我們生活在一個勢在難免的時代，某些“陷阱”是命中注定的，共產黨的主宰地位是未來。我們的做法並非注定要失敗，因為美國並沒有在衰落。正如我今年早些時候在慕尼黑所說的，自由世界仍在獲勝。我們隻需要相信這一點，知道這一點，而且對此感到自豪。
世界各地的人們仍然希望來到開放的社會。他們來這裏學習。他們來這裏工作，他們來這裏為他們的家庭開創美好的生活。他們並不急於在中國定居。
現在是時候了。今天很高興來到這裏。時機很好。現在是自由國家采取行動的時候了。不是每個國家都會以同樣的方式應對中國的挑戰，他們也不應該如此。每個國家都必須自己悟出如何保護自己的主權、如何保護自己的經濟繁榮以及如何保護它的理念不被中共的觸角所染指。
但我呼籲每一個國家的每一位領導人開始做美國已經在做的事情，---那就是堅持從中國共產黨那裏得到對等、透明和問責。他們是一小夥統治者，遠非鐵板一塊。
這些簡單但強有力的標準將會產生巨大的效果。我們讓中共來製定接觸條件的時間已經太久了。已經不再是這樣了。自由國家必須設定基調，我們必須在同樣的原則上運作。
我們必須劃定不會被中共的討價還價和甜言蜜語所衝洗掉的共同底線。事實上，美國最近就是這麽做的…我們一勞永逸地拒絕接受中國在南中國海海的非法聲索…同時，我們敦促各國成為潔淨國家，這樣他們公民的私人信息就不會落入中國共產黨的手中。我們通過設定標準來做到這一點。
的確，這是困難的。對於一些小國來說，這是困難的。他們害怕被一一幹掉。因為這個原因，一些國家此刻根本就沒有能力或是勇氣與我們站在一起。
的確，我們的一個北約盟國在香港問題上沒有以應有的方式挺身而出，因為他們害怕北京會限製他們進入中國市場。這種膽怯將導致曆史性的失敗。我們不能重蹈覆轍。
我們不能重複過去幾年的錯誤。麵對中國的挑戰，需要歐洲、非洲、南美、特別是印度-太平洋地區的民主國家使出力氣，投入精力。
如果我們現在不行動，最終，中國共產黨將侵蝕我們的自由，顛覆我們各國社會辛辛苦苦建立起來的基於規則的秩序。如果我們現在屈膝，我們的子孫後代可能會受中國共產黨的擺布，他們的行動是當今自由世界的首要挑戰。
中國的習總書記注定不會永遠在中國內外施行暴政，除非我們允許這種情況發生。
這不是關於遏製。不要相信這個。這是關於我們從未麵對過的一個複雜的新挑戰：蘇聯當時與自由世界是隔絕的。共產中國已經在我們的境內了。
所以我們不能獨自麵對這個挑戰。聯合國、北約、七國集團、20國集團，如果我們有明確的方向和巨大的勇氣，我們的經濟、外交和軍事力量的結合肯定足以應對這一挑戰。
也許是時候建立一個誌同道合國家的新聯盟了，一個新的民主聯盟。
我們有工具。我知道我們能夠做到。現在我們需要的是意誌。我要引用《聖經》裏的一句話來問：“我們的心靈固然願意，肉體卻軟弱了?”
如果自由世界不改變共產中國，共產中國肯定會改變我們。不能僅僅因為過去的做法舒服或方便就回到這些做法。
從中國共產黨手中確保我們的自由是我們這個時代的使命，而美國處於領導這個使命的最佳位置，因為我們的建國原則給了我們這個機會。
正如上星期我定睛站在費城獨立廳時所解釋的那樣，我們的國家建立在這樣的前提上，即人人擁有某些不可剝奪的權利。
保障這些權利是政府的職責。這一簡單而有力的事實已使美國成為包括中國在內的全世界人民所向往的自由燈塔。
理查德•尼克鬆在1967年寫道：“ 除非中國改變，世界不會安全。”他說的太對了。現在要靠我們來聽從他的話了。
今天，危險顯而易見。
今天，覺醒正在發生。
今天，自由世界必須做出回應。
我們永遠也不能回到過去。
願上帝保佑你們每一個人！
願上帝保佑中國人民！
願上帝保佑美利堅合眾國的人民！
謝謝大家!
GOVERNOR WILSON: Well, thank you very much, Chris. Most generous. I’m not sure your grandfather would have recognized me.
I have the great pleasure – in addition to welcoming all of you to the Nixon birthplace and library, I have the great pleasure of introducing to you an extraordinary American who is here at an extraordinary time. But the fun of it is in introducing our honored guest, I also am welcoming him not just to the Nixon Library, but I’m welcoming him back home to Orange County. (Applause.) That’s right. Mike Pompeo was born in Orange. (Applause.)
He attended Los Amigos High School in Fountain Valley, where he was an outstanding student and athlete. In fact, I have it on good authority that among the fans of glory days of Lobo basketball, a reverent hush descends upon the crowd whenever the name “Pompeo” is mentioned. (Laughter.)
The Secretary was first in his class at West Point. He won the award as the most distinguished cadet. He won another award for the highest achievement in engineering management. He spent his active duty years, his Army years, in West Germany, and as he put it, patrolling the Iron Curtain before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
In 1988 – excuse me – retiring with a rank of captain, he went on to Harvard Law School, where he was an editor of the Law Review. In 1988, he returned to his mother’s home state of Kansas and began a stunningly successful business career. He was elected to the House of Representatives from Kansas in 2011, where he soon gained great respect for a reputation as one of the most diligent and astute members of the House Arms – excuse me, the House Intelligence Committee.
In 2017, President Trump nominated him to be the director of Central Intelligence. And in 2018, he was confirmed as our 70th Secretary of State.
You have to admit, that’s quite an impressive resume. So it’s sad there’s only one thing missing, prevents it from being perfect. If only Mike had been a Marine. (Laughter.) Don’t worry, he’ll get even.
Mike Pompeo is a man devoted to his family. He is a man of faith, of the greatest patriotism and the highest principle. One of his most important initiatives at the State Department has been the creation of a Commission on Unalienable Rights where academicians, philosophers, and ethicists advise him on human rights grounded in America’s founding principles and the principles of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Rights.
He is here today for a very special reason. The epitaph on President Nixon’s gravestone is a sentence from his first inaugural address. It says, quote, “The greatest honor history can bestow is the title of peacemaker.” Richard Nixon received that title. He won that honor not only because he was acknowledged even by his critics to be a brilliant foreign policy strategist, but it was far more because he earned it. He learned as congressman, senator, president, and every day thereafter as a private citizen ambassador that peace is not achieved by signing documents and declaring the job done. To the contrary, he knew that peace is always a work in progress. He knew that peace must be fought for and won anew in every generation.
It was President Nixon’s vision, determination, and courage that opened China to America and to the Western world. As president and for the rest of his life, Richard Nixon worked to build a relationship with China based upon mutual benefits and obligations that respected America’s bedrock national interests.
Today, we in America are obliged to assess whether or not President Nixon’s labors and his hopes for such a relationship have been met or whether they are being undermined.
That is why it is of such great significance that our honored guest, Secretary Pompeo, has chosen the Nixon Library from which to deliver a major China policy statement. It will, I promise you, be a statement of complete clarity delivered with force and with belief because it is of critical importance.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is my great honor and pleasure to welcome to this podium and to this audience our honored guest, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, the honorable and really quite remarkable – honorable Michael R. Pompeo. (Applause.)
SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you, Governor, for that very, very generous introduction. It is true: When you walk in that gym and you say the name “Pompeo,” there is a whisper. I had a brother, Mark, who was really good – a really good basketball player.
And how about another round of applause for the Blue Eagles Honor Guard and Senior Airman Kayla Highsmith, and her wonderful rendition of the national anthem? (Applause.)
Thank you, too, to Pastor Laurie for that moving prayer, and I want to thank Hugh Hewitt and the Nixon Foundation for your invitation to speak at this important American institution. It was great to be sung to by an Air Force person, introduced by a Marine, and they let the Army guy in in front of the Navy guy’s house. (Laughter.) It’s all good.
It’s an honor to be here in Yorba Linda, where Nixon’s father built the house in which he was born and raised.
To all the Nixon Center board and staff who made today possible – it’s difficult in these times – thanks for making this day possible for me and for my team.
We are blessed to have some incredibly special people in the audience, including Chris, who I’ve gotten to know – Chris Nixon. I also want to thank Tricia Nixon and Julie Nixon Eisenhower for their support of this visit as well.
I want to recognize several courageous Chinese dissidents who have joined us here today and made a long trip.
And to all the other distinguished guests – (applause) – to all the other distinguished guests, thank you for being here. For those of you who got under the tent, you must have paid extra.
And those of you watching live, thank you for tuning in.
And finally, as the governor mentioned, I was born here in Santa Ana, not very far from here. I’ve got my sister and her husband in the audience today. Thank you all for coming out. I bet you never thought that I’d be standing up here.
My remarks today are the fourth set of remarks in a series of China speeches that I asked National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien, FBI Director Chris Wray, and the Attorney General Barr to deliver alongside me.
We had a very clear purpose, a real mission. It was to explain the different facets of America’s relationship with China, the massive imbalances in that relationship that have built up over decades, and the Chinese Communist Party’s designs for hegemony.
Our goal was to make clear that the threats to Americans that President Trump’s China policy aims to address are clear and our strategy for securing those freedoms established.
Ambassador O’Brien spoke about ideology. FBI Director Wray talked about espionage. Attorney General Barr spoke about economics. And now my goal today is to put it all together for the American people and detail what the China threat means for our economy, for our liberty, and indeed for the future of free democracies around the world.
Next year marks half a century since Dr. Kissinger’s secret mission to China, and the 50th anniversary of President Nixon’s trip isn’t too far away in 2022.
The world was much different then.
We imagined engagement with China would produce a future with bright promise of comity and cooperation.
But today – today we’re all still wearing masks and watching the pandemic’s body count rise because the CCP failed in its promises to the world. We’re reading every morning new headlines of repression in Hong Kong and in Xinjiang.
We’re seeing staggering statistics of Chinese trade abuses that cost American jobs and strike enormous blows to the economies all across America, including here in southern California. And we’re watching a Chinese military that grows stronger and stronger, and indeed more menacing.
I’ll echo the questions ringing in the hearts and minds of Americans from here in California to my home state of Kansas and beyond:
What do the American people have to show now 50 years on from engagement with China?
Did the theories of our leaders that proposed a Chinese evolution towards freedom and democracy prove to be true?
Is this China’s definition of a win-win situation?
And indeed, centrally, from the Secretary of State’s perspective, is America safer? Do we have a greater likelihood of peace for ourselves and peace for the generations which will follow us?
Look, we have to admit a hard truth. We must admit a hard truth that should guide us in the years and decades to come, that if we want to have a free 21st century, and not the Chinese century of which Xi Jinping dreams, the old paradigm of blind engagement with China simply won’t get it done. We must not continue it and we must not return to it.
As President Trump has made very clear, we need a strategy that protects the American economy, and indeed our way of life. The free world must triumph over this new tyranny.
Now, before I seem too eager to tear down President Nixon’s legacy, I want to be clear that he did what he believed was best for the American people at the time, and he may well have been right.
He was a brilliant student of China, a fierce cold warrior, and a tremendous admirer of the Chinese people, just as I think we all are.
He deserves enormous credit for realizing that China was too important to be ignored, even when the nation was weakened because of its own self-inflicted communist brutality.
In 1967, in a very famous Foreign Affairs article, Nixon explained his future strategy. Here’s what he said:
He said, “Taking the long view, we simply cannot afford to leave China forever outside of the family of nations…The world cannot be safe until China changes. Thus, our aim – to the extent we can, we must influence events. Our goal should be to induce change.”
And I think that’s the key phrase from the entire article: “to induce change.”
So, with that historic trip to Beijing, President Nixon kicked off our engagement strategy. He nobly sought a freer and safer world, and he hoped that the Chinese Communist Party would return that commitment.
As time went on, American policymakers increasingly presumed that as China became more prosperous, it would open up, it would become freer at home, and indeed present less of a threat abroad, it’d be friendlier. It all seemed, I am sure, so inevitable.
But that age of inevitability is over. The kind of engagement we have been pursuing has not brought the kind of change inside of China that President Nixon had hoped to induce.
The truth is that our policies – and those of other free nations – resurrected China’s failing economy, only to see Beijing bite the international hands that were feeding it.
We opened our arms to Chinese citizens, only to see the Chinese Communist Party exploit our free and open society. China sent propagandists into our press conferences, our research centers, our high-schools, our colleges, and even into our PTA meetings.
We marginalized our friends in Taiwan, which later blossomed into a vigorous democracy.
We gave the Chinese Communist Party and the regime itself special economic treatment, only to see the CCP insist on silence over its human rights abuses as the price of admission for Western companies entering China.
Ambassador O’Brien ticked off a few examples just the other day: Marriott, American Airlines, Delta, United all removed references to Taiwan from their corporate websites, so as not to anger Beijing.
In Hollywood, not too far from here – the epicenter of American creative freedom, and self-appointed arbiters of social justice – self-censors even the most mildly unfavorable reference to China.
This corporate acquiescence to the CCP happens all over the world, too.
And how has this corporate fealty worked? Is its flattery rewarded? I’ll give you a quote from the speech that General Barr gave, Attorney General Barr. In a speech last week, he said that “The ultimate ambition of China’s rulers isn’t to trade with the United States. It is to raid the United States.”
China ripped off our prized intellectual property and trade secrets, causing millions of jobs[1] all across America.
It sucked supply chains away from America, and then added a widget made of slave labor.
It made the world’s key waterways less safe for international commerce.
President Nixon once said he feared he had created a “Frankenstein” by opening the world to the CCP, and here we are.
Now, people of good faith can debate why free nations allowed these bad things to happen for all these years. Perhaps we were naive about China’s virulent strain of communism, or triumphalist after our victory in the Cold War, or cravenly capitalist, or hoodwinked by Beijing’s talk of a “peaceful rise.”
Whatever the reason – whatever the reason, today China is increasingly authoritarian at home, and more aggressive in its hostility to freedom everywhere else.
And President Trump has said: enough.
I don’t think many people on either side of the aisle dispute the facts that I have laid out today. But even now, some are insisting that we preserve the model of dialogue for dialogue’s sake.
Now, to be clear, we’ll keep on talking. But the conversations are different these days. I traveled to Honolulu now just a few weeks back to meet with Yang Jiechi.
It was the same old story – plenty of words, but literally no offer to change any of the behaviors.
Yang’s promises, like so many the CCP made before him, were empty. His expectations, I surmise, were that I’d cave to their demands, because frankly this is what too many prior administrations have done. I didn’t, and President Trump will not either.
As Ambassador O’Brien explained so well, we have to keep in mind that the CCP regime is a Marxist-Leninist regime. General Secretary Xi Jinping is a true believer in a bankrupt totalitarian ideology.
It’s this ideology, it’s this ideology that informs his decades-long desire for global hegemony of Chinese communism. America can no longer ignore the fundamental political and ideological differences between our countries, just as the CCP has never ignored them.
My experience in the House Intelligence Committee, and then as director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and my now two-plus years as America’s Secretary of State have led me to this central understanding:
That the only way – the only way to truly change communist China is to act not on the basis of what Chinese leaders say, but how they behave. And you can see American policy responding to this conclusion. President Reagan said that he dealt with the Soviet Union on the basis of “trust but verify.” When it comes to the CCP, I say we must distrust and verify. (Applause.)
We, the freedom-loving nations of the world, must induce China to change, just as President Nixon wanted. We must induce China to change in more creative and assertive ways, because Beijing’s actions threaten our people and our prosperity.
We must start by changing how our people and our partners perceive the Chinese Communist Party. We have to tell the truth. We can’t treat this incarnation of China as a normal country, just like any other.
We know that trading with China is not like trading with a normal, law-abiding nation. Beijing threatens international agreements as – treats international suggestions as – or agreements as suggestions, as conduits for global dominance.
But by insisting on fair terms, as our trade representative did when he secured our phase one trade deal, we can force China to reckon with its intellectual property theft and policies that harmed American workers.
We know too that doing business with a CCP-backed company is not the same as doing business with, say, a Canadian company. They don’t answer to independent boards, and many of them are state-sponsored and so have no need to pursue profits.
A good example is Huawei. We stopped pretending Huawei is an innocent telecommunications company that’s just showing up to make sure you can talk to your friends. We’ve called it what it is – a true national security threat – and we’ve taken action accordingly.
We know too that if our companies invest in China, they may wittingly or unwittingly support the Communist Party’s gross human rights violations.
Our Departments of Treasury and Commerce have thus sanctioned and blacklisted Chinese leaders and entities that are harming and abusing the most basic rights for people all across the world. Several agencies have worked together on a business advisory to make certain our CEOs are informed of how their supply chains are behaving inside of China.
We know too, we know too that not all Chinese students and employees are just normal students and workers that are coming here to make a little bit of money and to garner themselves some knowledge. Too many of them come here to steal our intellectual property and to take this back to their country.
The Department of Justice and other agencies have vigorously pursued punishment for these crimes.
We know that the People’s Liberation Army is not a normal army, too. Its purpose is to uphold the absolute rule of the Chinese Communist Party elites and expand a Chinese empire, not to protect the Chinese people.
And so our Department of Defense has ramped up its efforts, freedom of navigation operations out and throughout the East and South China Seas, and in the Taiwan Strait as well. And we’ve created a Space Force to help deter China from aggression on that final frontier.
And so too, frankly, we’ve built out a new set of policies at the State Department dealing with China, pushing President Trump’s goals for fairness and reciprocity, to rewrite the imbalances that have grown over decades.
Just this week, we announced the closure of the Chinese consulate in Houston because it was a hub of spying and intellectual property theft. (Applause.)
We reversed, two weeks ago, eight years of cheek-turning with respect to international law in the South China Sea.
We’ve called on China to conform its nuclear capabilities to the strategic realities of our time.
And the State Department – at every level, all across the world – has engaged with our Chinese counterparts simply to demand fairness and reciprocity.
But our approach can’t just be about getting tough. That’s unlikely to achieve the outcome that we desire. We must also engage and empower the Chinese people – a dynamic, freedom-loving people who are completely distinct from the Chinese Communist Party.
That begins with in-person diplomacy. (Applause.) I’ve met Chinese men and women of great talent and diligence wherever I go.
I’ve met with Uyghurs and ethnic Kazakhs who escaped Xinjiang’s concentration camps. I’ve talked with Hong Kong’s democracy leaders, from Cardinal Zen to Jimmy Lai. Two days ago in London, I met with Hong Kong freedom fighter Nathan Law.
And last month in my office, I heard the stories of Tiananmen Square survivors. One of them is here today.
Wang Dan was a key student who has never stopped fighting for freedom for the Chinese people. Mr. Wang, will you please stand so that we may recognize you? (Applause.)
Also with us today is the father of the Chinese democracy movement, Wei Jingsheng. He spent decades in Chinese labor camps for his advocacy. Mr. Wei, will you please stand? (Applause.)
I grew up and served my time in the Army during the Cold War. And if there is one thing I learned, communists almost always lie. The biggest lie that they tell is to think that they speak for 1.4 billion people who are surveilled, oppressed, and scared to speak out.
Quite the contrary. The CCP fears the Chinese people’s honest opinions more than any foe, and save for losing their own grip on power, they have reason – no reason to.
Just think how much better off the world would be – not to mention the people inside of China – if we had been able to hear from the doctors in Wuhan and they’d been allowed to raise the alarm about the outbreak of a new and novel virus.
For too many decades, our leaders have ignored, downplayed the words of brave Chinese dissidents who warned us about the nature of the regime we’re facing.
And we can’t ignore it any longer. They know as well as anyone that we can never go back to the status quo.
But changing the CCP’s behavior cannot be the mission of the Chinese people alone. Free nations have to work to defend freedom. It’s the furthest thing from easy.
But I have faith we can do it. I have faith because we’ve done it before. We know how this goes.
I have faith because the CCP is repeating some of the same mistakes that the Soviet Union made – alienating potential allies, breaking trust at home and abroad, rejecting property rights and predictable rule of law.
I have faith. I have faith because of the awakening I see among other nations that know we can’t go back to the past in the same way that we do here in America. I’ve heard this from Brussels, to Sydney, to Hanoi.
And most of all, I have faith we can defend freedom because of the sweet appeal of freedom itself.
Look at the Hong Kongers clamoring to emigrate abroad as the CCP tightens its grip on that proud city. They wave American flags.
It’s true, there are differences. Unlike the Soviet Union, China is deeply integrated into the global economy. But Beijing is more dependent on us than we are on them. (Applause.)
Look, I reject the notion that we’re living in an age of inevitability, that some trap is pre-ordained, that CCP supremacy is the future. Our approach isn’t destined to fail because America is in decline. As I said in Munich earlier this year, the free world is still winning. We just need to believe it and know it and be proud of it. People from all over the world still want to come to open societies. They come here to study, they come here to work, they come here to build a life for their families. They’re not desperate to settle in China.
It’s time. It’s great to be here today. The timing is perfect. It’s time for free nations to act. Not every nation will approach China in the same way, nor should they. Every nation will have to come to its own understanding of how to protect its own sovereignty, how to protect its own economic prosperity, and how to protect its ideals from the tentacles of the Chinese Communist Party.
But I call on every leader of every nation to start by doing what America has done – to simply insist on reciprocity, to insist on transparency and accountability from the Chinese Communist Party. It’s a cadre of rulers that are far from homogeneous.
And these simple and powerful standards will achieve a great deal. For too long we let the CCP set the terms of engagement, but no longer. Free nations must set the tone. We must operate on the same principles.
We have to draw common lines in the sand that cannot be washed away by the CCP’s bargains or their blandishments. Indeed, this is what the United States did recently when we rejected China’s unlawful claims in the South China Sea once and for all, as we have urged countries to become Clean Countries so that their citizens’ private information doesn’t end up in the hand of the Chinese Communist Party. We did it by setting standards.
Now, it’s true, it’s difficult. It’s difficult for some small countries. They fear being picked off. Some of them for that reason simply don’t have the ability, the courage to stand with us for the moment.
Indeed, we have a NATO ally of ours that hasn’t stood up in the way that it needs to with respect to Hong Kong because they fear Beijing will restrict access to China’s market. This is the kind of timidity that will lead to historic failure, and we can’t repeat it.
We cannot repeat the mistakes of these past years. The challenge of China demands exertion, energy from democracies – those in Europe, those in Africa, those in South America, and especially those in the Indo-Pacific region.
And if we don’t act now, ultimately the CCP will erode our freedoms and subvert the rules-based order that our societies have worked so hard to build. If we bend the knee now, our children’s children may be at the mercy of the Chinese Communist Party, whose actions are the primary challenge today in the free world.
General Secretary Xi is not destined to tyrannize inside and outside of China forever, unless we allow it.
Now, this isn’t about containment. Don’t buy that. It’s about a complex new challenge that we’ve never faced before. The USSR was closed off from the free world. Communist China is already within our borders.
So we can’t face this challenge alone. The United Nations, NATO, the G7 countries, the G20, our combined economic, diplomatic, and military power is surely enough to meet this challenge if we direct it clearly and with great courage.
Maybe it’s time for a new grouping of like-minded nations, a new alliance of democracies.
We have the tools. I know we can do it. Now we need the will. To quote scripture, I ask is “our spirit willing but our flesh weak?”
If the free world doesn’t change – doesn’t change, communist China will surely change us. There can’t be a return to the past practices because they’re comfortable or because they’re convenient.
Securing our freedoms from the Chinese Communist Party is the mission of our time, and America is perfectly positioned to lead it because our founding principles give us that opportunity.
As I explained in Philadelphia last week, standing, staring at Independence Hall, our nation was founded on the premise that all human beings possess certain rights that are unalienable.
And it’s our government’s job to secure those rights. It is a simple and powerful truth. It’s made us a beacon of freedom for people all around the world, including people inside of China.
Indeed, Richard Nixon was right when he wrote in 1967 that “the world cannot be safe until China changes.” Now it’s up to us to heed his words.
Today the danger is clear.
And today the awakening is happening.
Today the free world must respond.
We can never go back to the past.
May God bless each of you.
May God bless the Chinese people.
And may God bless the people of the United States of America.
Thank you all.
(Applause.)
MR HEWITT: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Please be seated. I’m Hugh Hewitt, the president of the library, and Secretary Pompeo graciously invited some questions as I was listening. Thank you for joining us, Mr. Secretary, at the Nixon Library.
My first question has to do with the context of the president’s visit in 1972. You mentioned the Soviet Union was isolated, but it was dangerous. He went to the People’s Republic of China in 1972 to try and ally and combine interests with them against the Soviet Union; it was successful.
Does Russia present an opportunity now to the United States to coax them into the battle to be relentlessly candid about the Chinese Communist Party?
SECRETARY POMPEO: So I do think there’s that opportunity. That opportunity is born of the relationship, the natural relationship between Russia and China, and we can do something as well. There are places where we need to work with Russia. Today – or tomorrow, I guess it is, our teams will be on the ground with the Russians working on a strategic dialogue to hopefully create the next generation of arms control agreements like Reagan did. It’s in our interest, it’s in Russia’s interest. We’ve asked the Chinese to participate. They’ve declined to date. We hope they’ll change their mind.
It’s these kind of things – these proliferation issues, these big strategic challenges – that if we work alongside Russia, I’m convinced we can make the world safer. And so there – I think there is a place for us to work with the Russians to achieve a more likely outcome of peace not only for the United States but for the world.
MR HEWITT: President Nixon also put quite a lot of store in personal relationships over many years with individuals. That can lead wrong. President Bush famously misjudged Vladimir Putin and said so afterwards. You have met President Xi often. Is the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party someone with whom we can deal on a transparent and reliable basis, in your opinion, based on your personal diplomacy with him?
SECRETARY POMPEO: So the meetings that I’ve had and the meeting that the President – we’ve had – they’ve been good, frank conversations. He is the most powerful leader of China since Mao. He has also in many ways deinstitutionalized the Chinese Communist Party, thus giving him even more capacity and more power.
But Hugh, I think the way to think about it is how I spoke about this today: It’s about actions. And so how one evaluates one’s counterparts sitting across the table from them – it’s important to think about how you can find common understandings and make progress. But in the end, it’s not about what someone says or the agreement that they sign, but are they prepared to lead, to do the things that they committed to? Are they prepared to fulfill their promises?
And we’ve watched – we’ve watched this China walk away from their promises to the world on Hong Kong, we watched their – General Secretary Xi promised President Obama in the Rose Garden in 2015 that he wouldn’t militarize the South China Sea. And Google the South China Sea and arms; you’ll see another promise broken.
So in the end, from my perspective, it’s much more important to watch how leaders behave and how they lead than what it is you think when you have a chance to talk to them on the phone or meet them in person.
MR HEWITT: Mr. Secretary, you said this is not containment. I heard that very clearly. I have read the three previous speeches by Ambassador O’Brien, Director Wray, Attorney General Barr, and now listened to you very closely. It isn’t containment, but it is a fairly comprehensive, multidimensional, relentlessly objective candor. Is that dangerous in a world that’s not used to speaking clearly about delicate subjects?
SECRETARY POMPEO: My experience, and I think President Trump’s experience too in his life as a businessman, is the best policy is always true candor, identifying the places that you have a redline, identifying places that you have a real interest, making clear if there’s places where you don’t, and there’s things that you can work on alongside each other.
I think the real danger comes from misunderstandings and miscommunication and the failure to be honest about the things that matter to you, because others will move into that space and then conflict arises. I think the world is a heck of a lot safer when you have leaders who are prepared to be honest about the things that matter and prepared to talk about the things their nation is prepared to do to secure those interests. And you can reduce risk by these conversations so long as you’re honest about it.
So I – no, I don’t think it’s dangerous. I think it’s just the opposite of that.
MR HEWITT: You also said – and I’m sure the speech will be known as the “distrust but verify” speech – when you distrust but verify, that still premises verification is possible. It is still possible to do agreements and to verify them; correct?
SECRETARY POMPEO: It is, yeah, you can still do it. Each nation’s got to be prepared for a certain amount of intrusiveness connected to that. And it is not in the nature of communist regimes to allow transparency inside of their country. And so it’s been done before. We’ve had – we had arms control agreements with the Soviet Union that we got verification that was sufficient to ensure that we protected American interests. I believe we can do it again. I hope that we can do this on these – I mean, the Chinese Communist Party has several hundred nuclear warheads. This is a serious global power. And to the extent we can find common ground, a common set of understandings to reduce risk that there’s ever a really bad day for the world, we ought to do it, and it’s going to require agreement and verification.
MR HEWITT: Ambassador Richard Haass, who is now chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, said very recently – it may have been yesterday, it might have been this morning; I saw it this morning preparing – quote, “Secretary Pompeo doesn’t speak of China but of the Chinese Communist Party as if there were a China apart from the party. This is meant to antagonize and make diplomacy impossible. Quite a stance for America’s chief diplomat to take unless his goal is to ensure diplomacy fails.” Is that your goal?
SECRETARY POMPEO: (Laughter.) Ah, goodness. Hard to begin. Here’s where I’ll begin: It’s a bit patronizing to the people of China to make such an assertion that they are not free-thinking beings, that they’re not rational people who were given – I mean, they too were made in the image of God, right. They have all the capacity that anybody in the world does. So to somehow think that we ought to ignore the voices of the people of China seems to me the wrong approach. It is true the Chinese Communist Party is a one-party rule. And so we will deal with the Chinese Communist Party as the head of state for China, and we need to, and we need to engage in dialogue. But it seems to me we would dishonor ourselves and the people of China if we ignored them.
MR HEWITT: Now, Ambassador O’Brien, whose speech you referenced, put heavy emphasis on the ideology of Marxist-Leninism. It was almost quaint to hear that conversation again; it’s gone from our vocabulary. Does the American people, and especially American media, need to reacquaint itself with what Marxist-Leninists believe, because the CCP genuinely does believe it?
SECRETARY POMPEO: I always get in trouble, Hugh, when I comment on the media. So I’ll say this much: For those of us who have lived and seen and observed, there are other Marxist-Leninist nations today as well – and have seen – they believe – they have an understanding, a central understanding of how people interact and how societies ought to interact. And it is certainly the case today that the leadership in China believes that.
We should acknowledge that, and we should make sure that we don’t for a moment think that they don’t believe it. It’s what Ambassador O’Brien’s speech was about. It was the fact – it was acknowledging that they believe it and recognizing that we have to respond in a way that reflects our understanding of the way they view the world.
MR HEWITT: Let’s not talk about the American media. I want to talk about the Chinese media for a moment. They are aggressive, to say the least, and right now they are aggressively defending, for example, TikTok. A small question within a large question: Is TikTok capable of being weaponized? Is that an example of what’s going on? And generally, Chinese media has become far more aggressive than I’ve seen in 30 years since I was at the library the first time of watching it. Is that something you’ve noticed as well?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yes, they’re very aggressive. Two pieces to this, one you hit upon. One is I’ll describe as their technology medium. Without singling out any particular business, our view of these companies is we’re neither for or against the company; we’re about making sure that we protect the information that belongs to each of you – your health records, your face if it’s a facial recognition software, your address. All the things that you care that you want to make sure the Chinese Communist Party doesn’t have, we have a responsibility to make sure that the systems that you’re using don’t give them access to that. And so whether it’s the efforts we’ve made against Huawei or the work that we’re doing on other software firms, the American task is to protect the American people and their information.
The second piece of this has to do with their – what I’ll call the state-sponsored media of China and their disinformation. You should know – and this is where I am concerned about the American media, too – these are state-sponsored media organizations that take their messaging from the Chinese Communist Party each day. When American institutions pick up those storylines and carry them forward, they are, in fact, propagating Chinese propaganda, and we all ought to be wise to that.
There was an editorial in The New York Times yesterday by someone who had a clear view that was antithetical to the American way of life. The New York Times ran it straight-up without comment, forwarding – although albeit in the opinion section, but propagating Chinese propaganda. That is certainly not instructive when they’re telling senators from Arkansas they can’t simply talk about America and American freedom in that same media outlet.
MR HEWITT: You mentioned that a lot of corporate America – and you mentioned specifically Hollywood – have got deep intertwinement with the Chinese economy. So I don’t want to talk about soft power; I want to talk about soft appeasement. One of my favorite sports figures, LeBron James, falls silent when China comes up. In the new Top Gun movie, the Taiwan and Japanese patches are taken off Maverick’s jacket. They’re not going to be in Top Gun 2; they were in Top Gun 1. What do you say not to those individuals, but to everyone who has an American spotlight about their responsibility to be candid about the People’s Republic of China?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Here’s our ask: Our ask is if you claim that you care about human rights or social justice or these things, if you make that part of your corporate theology, then you ought to be consistent. And you can’t be consistent if you’re operating there in China without talking about and acknowledging what the Chinese Communist Party is doing in certain parts of their country – the oppression that’s taking place. Look, every business leader has got to make decisions for themselves. They’ve got to be able to live with the decisions that they make. You highlighted a few.
I’d simply ask this: If you run an entity and the United States Government were to tell you you couldn’t do something, put a particular symbol in your movie or put a particular name on your menu – if we were to tell you that, you’d say nope, that’s not appropriate, and it, of course, would not be appropriate. It seems to me that if you permit the Chinese Communist Party to limit you in that way, it’s got to be difficult for you to go home at night.
MR HEWITT: Two more questions, Mr. Secretary. (Applause.) Because it is hot and it is warm, and everyone out here has been in the sun for a while. You’re a West Point graduate, and as Governor Wilson noted, number one, so this might be tough for you. But we are an, like Athens was, a naval power. America is a naval power. And as like Sparta is, China is a land power. Do we not have to change how we approach defense spending to put more emphasis on our naval resources than on our Army resources?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Oh, that’s tough for an Army guy to say. (Laughter.)
MR HEWITT: I know.
SECRETARY POMPEO: You’re killing me. Look, I’ll leave to Secretary Esper the details of this, but I can – here’s what I can say. When President Trump set out our National Security Strategy early on in the administration, for the first time we identified China in a way that was fundamentally different than we had done – this isn’t partisan – for decades.
That was important because that was a signal to all of us, whether it’s the State Department or the Defense Department, that we needed to reoriented our – reorient our assets. And so yes, you’ve seen the Department of Defense begin to do that. These are big things to turn. These budgets are multiyear. It takes a while.
But if you look at how Secretary Esper and President Trump are positioning our military capabilities – not just the tactical, operational, and strategic capabilities, but our cyber capabilities, our space capabilities – if you look at how we’re thinking about this and spending resources in year two, three, four, and five, I think you’ll see that our focus has shifted pretty dramatically.
It’s not to say that our efforts to protect America from terrorism are behind us. We still have work to do there. But I think this great power challenge that presents itself is something that we have recognized and we begin to make sure that we allocate your money – our taxpayer resources that we have – to the appropriate ends to achieve American security.
MR HEWITT: My last question has to do with a former secretary of state who was also an Army man, George Marshall. He gave a speech in 1947 at your alma mater, Harvard, in which he called on all the nations of the world to recognize that the world was in crisis and to choose a side. And he assured them in that famous address that if you chose the American side in (inaudible) Europe, you could count on America.
So as you make the appeal you did today, not just to Europe, where it’s relatively easy to be outspoken, though Norway has found it not to be outspoken, but to Taiwan and Japan and Vietnam and all of the – Australia, all of the nations of that region – can they rely on America in the way that people opposing the Soviet Union could rely on George Marshall’s assurance in 1947?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Undoubtedly, undoubtedly, Hugh. The only thing I’ll say is when – this language of “pick a side” does make sense to me, but I think about picking a side differently than picking America or picking China. I think the sides, the division – the shirts and skins, if you will – is between freedom and tyranny. I think that’s the decision that we’re asking each of these nations to make. (Applause.)
And here’s the good news of this. The good news is it does take American leadership often in these cases. To your point, they need to know that America will be there for them. I’ve seen the tide turn. In just – in just these three and half years of our administration, I’ve watched other nations have less timidity, become more prepared to stand up for their freedoms and for the freedoms of their people. We don’t ask them to do this for America. We ask them to do it for their country and for their nation – the freedom and the independence and to protect the rights of their people.
And when we do that and we tell them that America will be there, I am very confident in the end that this is a world that with the hard work applied will become one that is governed by a rules-based order, and the freedom of the American people will be secured.
MR HEWITT: Mr. Secretary, thank you for joining us here today.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you.
MR HEWITT: Please join me in thanking the Secretary. (Applause.)
SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you all.
